Why the price increase on Tokina ultra-wides?

Been saving pennies to pick up a Tokina ultra-wide (some of you helped make my decision). My friend was about to buy the 11-16 f2.8 and he called me yesterday to find out if I'd heard why the price went up around $100 over night. We checked a bunch of different sites and all of them increased the price. Obviously, this means Tokina increased the price.

Anyone heard why this is? I mean, other than them thinking it makes sense (probably does actually) because nobody else has an f2.8 ultra wide right now and them having the best reputations for ultra wides. This plain old sucks.

Actually considering the new Sigma 10-20 (is it?) f3.5 now. About the same price as the Tokina 11-16 used to be. Reviews have been good. When the price was the same as the Tokina, I would have gone with the Tokina based on reputation alone (Sigma still has that whole QC issue apparently). But now...

Sigma QC issues are overblown, don't be put off by them. Also, if you're looking at the sigma 10-20, get the old version. The new version isn't that much better, but costs a whole lot more. IMO at the price point of the new version, you might as well jump in the deep end and get the canon 10-22. The main consideration for not getting the 3.5 version of the sigma though, is the 82mm filter thread. 82mm filters are on a whole new level in terms of price compared to 77mm which are already expensive enough as it is. And trust me, you will eventually be getting filters if you own an UWA.

I was looking at this lens last year when it was $599, then $659, now $719. This is the only f/2.8 lens that goes wider than 14mm, I believe, so there's no competition for this lens. Also, I know that the Tokina 50-135 f/2.8 is now being sold mainly in Japan now and not in the U.S., so possibly the same is happening for the 11-16?

I noticed that the Tokina 11-16 is no longer available on BH. They've been out of stock for a while.

Maybe they factored dollar/yen ratios into the price? Who knows why they raised the price, but if you want it you should grab it before they do it again (or look around for a used one). Looking on EBay, there are lots of them for sale, quite a few under $650.

Loved my Sigma 10-20 on a crop. I usually shot at f/8 anyways because it was mainly used ofr landscape shots where f/2.8 is rarely used in my type of shooting.

Sirrith wrote in post #13216788
Sigma QC issues are overblown, don't be put off by them. Also, if you're looking at the sigma 10-20, get the old version. The new version isn't that much better, but costs a whole lot more. IMO at the price point of the new version, you might as well jump in the deep end and get the canon 10-22. The main consideration for not getting the 3.5 version of the sigma though, is the 82mm filter thread. 82mm filters are on a whole new level in terms of price compared to 77mm which are already expensive enough as it is. And trust me, you will eventually be getting filters if you own an UWA.

I'm with you on the QC issues. Although I've read the new version is better than the old but there aren't a LOT of reviews out.

I don't use filters so this isn't an issue. Although I've got to get some ND filters and start doing some with them. I've never owned an UWA so I don't know exactly what I'm getting into just yet.

rick_reno wrote in post #13217149
Maybe they factored dollar/yen ratios into the price? Who knows why they raised the price, but if you want it you should grab it before they do it again (or look around for a used one). Looking on EBay, there are lots of them for sale, quite a few under $650.

If I had the money before I'd have grabbed it. It's not in the budget just yet so I have to wait and hope I can find a good price on one.

GadgetRick wrote in post #13217336
I'm with you on the QC issues. Although I've read the new version is better than the old but there aren't a LOT of reviews out.

I don't use filters so this isn't an issue. Although I've got to get some ND filters and start doing some with them. I've never owned an UWA so I don't know exactly what I'm getting into just yet.

Its better, but the price increase isn't proportionate to the better-ness, so its better to just go for the old version.

You don't use them now, but you will at some point, and then you'll regret having gone 82mm

I think its a US$ to Yen conversion reason since the price in the UK hasn't shifted - it might also be representing some manner of reducing the demand on the lens to allow them to better meet the stock requirements in the US market.

I just picked mine up at the local store here in Fort Worth for $659 they said they don't plan on raising the price.

Overread wrote in post #13217925
I think its a US$ to Yen conversion reason since the price in the UK hasn't shifted - it might also be representing some manner of reducing the demand on the lens to allow them to better meet the stock requirements in the US market.

Yeah US price was way below UK price, I did a comparison a week or so ago and the US price was £150GBP (or so) cheaper whilst other lenses are much closer in price (no more than £70). So it sort of brings the Tokina US price in line.

Sirrith wrote in post #13216788
Sigma QC issues are overblown ...

And that is putting it mildly.

dfbovey wrote in post #13217113
I noticed that the Tokina 11-16 is no longer available on BH. They've been out of stock for a while.

BH can't keep that lens in stock for whatever reason. It is always out of stock on their site. I went thru Amazon for mine after trying BH first.

I think Tokina is having production problems so availability has been limited.